A sample text widget

Etiam pulvinar consectetur dolor sed malesuada. Ut convallis euismod dolor nec pretium. Nunc ut tristique massa.

Nam sodales mi vitae dolor ullamcorper et vulputate enim accumsan. Morbi orci magna, tincidunt vitae molestie nec, molestie at mi. Nulla nulla lorem, suscipit in posuere in, interdum non magna.

A New Old Left Religion: Human Sacrifice & Environmentalism

DEDICATED TO ALL MOTORCYCLE RIDERS
A NEW OLD LEFT RELIGION: SACRIFICES FREEDOM, RECREATION, JOBS
by Copyright, 1993, Roger B. Canfield, Easy Rider Magazine
Recently locked out of a park? Experiencing nature’s shrinking availability? You and
your bike denied access to the places you used to go? Lost your job in the
mountains, desert, or Central Valley? Can’t find any government official who
will respond to common sense? Here’s why.
It has a faith, priests, catechisms, rituals, human sacrifice and a value system prescribing what’s good
and what’s bad on Mother Earth. Believers deny this pantheism looks, sounds,
walks, talks, and smells like the old Lefist faiths of Socialism and Communism.
The undeclared religion names itself biodiversity and­ professes salvation for
insect and rat, owl and rat, but never Man, let alone a biker out to enjoy
nature.                 .
President Clinton signed the “Biodiversity Treaty of Rio in late April 1993, but
did not reveal how far advanced its implementation is at home, particularly in California. The undeclared
religion already holds power in newly emerging “bioregional” shadow
agencies in America as well as at the U.N. It has holy places in rain forests
and in the Sierra “Range of Light.”
Over a year ago [1992], Calfornia Resource Agency boss Douglas Wheeler held an
invitation-only summit for the “Sierra Province at Stanford University’s Fallen Leaf
Lake hideaway near Lake Tahoe. The Sierra Summit was attended by 150 top
bureaucrats working in fifteen federal and state agencies and as leaders of ten “ecstatic”
eco-groups who prepared an Environmental Briefing Book. No bikers, hunters,
fishermen cattlemen, property rights advocates, or farmers and very few elected
officials were welcome. No engraved invitations to vehicle users of any sort.
Some of the un-invited – State Legislators – heard of the summit and and
demanded their say. Wheeler and the enviro-crats repeated a mantra, no hidden agenda,
gave the suspicious fifteen minutes as “window dressing” at lunch,
released a sanitized report of the summit, and went home to implement their
agenda. (At a forest parlay in Portland in April, Clinton took care to invite
the unwashed, but don’t expect much help.)
The Sierra Summit was both a milestone in the movement and an insider’s view of a religious-like faith that
nature’s bounty – water, land, mineral, forest- be denied to un-invited humans.
Meanwhile, saw mills, mines, cattle ranches, and jobs, and families in little
Sierra towns like Foresthill, Westwood, and Alturas are  disappearing in the Sierra. California’s
deserts and the Central Valley are also losing jobs.
The Sierra is not a minor province. It is nearly as large as 12 states, makes up 18 of 58 California
counties, has a population close to that of eight states, provides 75 percent
of of the state’s surface water, hosts 33 million tourists a year, and produces
beef, timber and minerals to the world.
The Sierra Summit celebrated great powers.  Eco-worship is no longer silly
60’s hippe sentiments – it is insider power. Biodiversity’s priests are un-elected, unaccountable, and protected in
the civil services. The summit was like an Appala­chian Confab of Mafia dons,
but no one took photos of attire and limousines.
This Cosa Nostra sanctified itself by a prenuptial, a “Memorandum of Understanding: Agreement on
Biological Diversity,” signed by 10 federal and stare agencies. The
obscure Memo fit the political action manual of radical environmentalists.
Outside of mutual agreement, no new authority is needed – current law justifies
all and is being ordered into existence by bureaucrats, the new gestapo.
The summit was a single piece of a larger quilt laid out across the landscape, but
particularly m the mountains, valleys and deserts of California. Indeed, California and the nation are now
mapped by “bioregional provinces,” preserving land, air, and water — except His (Her) big mistake – Man.
“Participation” rituals are guided by the California Coordinated Resource Management and
Planning (CCRM) handbook. This holy writ lays out an official process of
“facilitators” manipulating local groups toward a “consensus.” Dissent is seldom reflected in the “common
ground” announced thereafter. These collective “agreements”
justify civil servants ruling over elected officials and citizens.
(“Partici­patory Democracy” of the 60’s New Left exhausts dissent.)
Many innocents are mesmerized by or seem obedient to the ritual. Resistant
locals are ignored.
The environmental movement is well down the road to its destination. The vehicle seems driven by political
appointees like California’s Wheeler, but back seat instructions come from
greater powers like the Sierra Club and life tenured bureaucrats. Resource use
industries (recreation, agriculture, energy, forestry, mining) pay for the gas
and hang on for the ride. Ordinary citizens (soon without jobs, food, fiber,
fuel. affordable housing) are road kill – human sacrifices proving the ultimate
fanaticism of “biodiversity.”
Taking habitat (land and water) to save allegedly endangered or “stressed” species has created
joblessness, near ghost towns and a new Appalachia of welfare dependency in the
Sierra, The new Appalachians earn $12,000 a year as nannies, maids, and ski
lift operators – mere serfs in the elites’ forests and soon its valleys and
deserts. Consumers face a doubling of commodity prices – lumber, minerals and
soon food. Only bio-correct hikers, rafters, and skiers prosper in the
“sustain­able,” read, subsistence economy of biodiversity.
The model for a policy to take land is the Spotted Owl, easily applied to “sav­ing” of marbled
murrelet, desert tortoise, Mojave ground squirrel, delta smelt, gnatcatcher,
kangaroo rat, and coastal chaparral. Amazingly 10.6 million acres of 14 million
high Sierra acres are under federal control. 24 percent of Ihe Sierra is designated
wilderness – off-limits to all but six percent of the people. 72 percent of the
Sierra is owned by government. The 30 percent still private, under tough state
and federal regulations, remains to be taken outright or regulated for the
benefit of ‘bio-diverse” habitat.
A model for the power to take private land is in use in the Tahoe Regional
Planning Agency and the South Coast Regional Air Quality District, to name only
two. These and other agencies have absolute power over land, air, and water – and people. They succeed
through regulations and by fig leaf “consensus” seldom announcing any
formal transfers of land and political power. Indeed, the U.S. Fish and
Wildlifc Service uses “taking” to describe private land and water not
yet in wildlife habitat. Thus the 5th Amenment prohibition against
the “taking of private property without just compensation” has been
turned on its head.
Their timeline for acquiring habitat is longer than the attention span of critics,
since patient believers have worked for years in the $600 million a year eco-move­ment and on public
payrolls. Many critics may be co-opted by either some cash (50
cents on the dollar), or “consensus” rituals, or worn out emotionally and financially.
The economic recession could slow the process. For example, the Spotted Owl may be given “only”
nine million acres – Massachusetts and Rhode Island com­bined – instead of  eleven million; “only” 30,000 now
lose their jobs instead of I 00,000 later; $1 billion instead of $9 billion in
federal funds is immediately spent for habitat and California bonds for
wildlife habitat stay at $2.2 billion – for a while. Still the faith, bolstered
by pseudo-science, prospers.
Honest wildlife scientists cautiously admit inadequate knowledge, but paid
Biodiversi-crats demand regional governance to acquire wildlife habitat – and to
fanatically deny human habitation, and enjoyment of nature. Scientifically illiterate and ~~
economically uniformed voters do not object- though the EPA is already taking
the equivalent of a family’s annual expenditure on clothing.
Part 2: Why and Where we’re losing.
Continued from Last Month- Part
2: Why and Where we’re losing
Chart I – “Biodiversity Value System” translates the “biodiversity”
literature into what’s good and bad and who wins and loses if the new religion
has its way. In short, the sparse remnants of America’s republican virtues
-Judeo-Christian values and democratic capitalism – would be swept aside.
Into the dust bin would go elections, local self government, property rights, free
markets, private contracts, access to “public” resources (water,
timber, grass, minerals), develop­ment of housing, roads, dams. Couched in
obscure language, these bioregional value choices become clear only when laid
side by side as in Chart I.
Chart II, “Man’s Perceived Threats to Nature,” shows everything harming nature.
Science is not so sure.

Chart I – Biodiversity Value System

Bad (want less)                                   Good (want more)
(Want less)
Man                                                     Animals, fish, insects, plants, grass, bacteria
Humans                                               Cutthroat trout, redhill roaches, yellow-legged frogs
Human pop. Growth                           Wildlife pop. growth
[abortion?]
Human rights                                      Animal rights
Alien (nonlocal) species                      Native local species
“Alien” bull frogs                                Red-legged frogs, yellow- legged
“Alien” brook, brown trout, catfish    Native golden trout, cutthroat trout
Domesticated plants/animals              Wild plants/animals
Domesticated animal breeding           Genetic diversity
Cows and sheep                                  Mountain lions, deer
Domestic pets (dogs/cats)                   Wolverines, badgers, foxes
New (planted) sequoias                      Old growth sequoia redwoods
Planted (Douglas) fir                          Yellow, digger pines, yews, subalpinefir, blue oak
Domesticated grass/bushes                 Weeds, wild scrubs
Livestock/grazing                                Wildlife habitats, native grasses
Grazing                                               Preservation of wetlands
Sewage systems development                        Wetland/marsh filter [microbes?]
Forest harvesting                                 Wild fires. woodpeckers, owls
Large clear cutting                              Small clear cutting
Clear cutting                                       Selective logging
Sustainable productivity                     Biological diversity
Logging clean-up                                Retain deadwood, snags
Range land                                          Pines, mountain meadows
Human housing                                   Wildlife nesting, rearing
Agricultural dust                                 Undisturbed soils of nature
Mining                                                 Wildlife habitat/corridors
Manufacturing industries                    Cottage/home industries
Extractive industries                           Service industries [slavery?]
Mobility:
Cattle ranges                                       Animal trails/corridors
Auto commuting                                 Telecommunicating
Autos, roads                                        Trails, bikes, skis, walking
Railroads                                             Trails
Off-roads, cycles,jeeps,snow              Backpacks, bikes, skies
Parking                                                Walking
Public access                                       Limited, controlled access
Herbicides                                           Alternatives to herbicides
Oil, plastics                                         Wood
Chemical fertilizer/cow dung              Deer dung
B. BAD (Less in the future)
Individual freedom/choice                  Collective decisions, concensus
Voluntary cooperation                        Government mandates, regulations,
Property rights, contracts                    Land use management, planning
Private profits                                     Non-profits,taxes,fees
Free market                                         Regulation/planning
Economic growth                                Growth management
Private research                                   Government research
Private employment                            Public employment
Property sales                                      Property exchanges, barter
Private property use                            Public access, private use denied
Mixed private/public ownership         Public ownership
Private property development             Public acquisition/easements
Privately owned property                   Public property [taking of private property]
Citizens                                               Experts
Elections                                             Group dynamics/consensus
Elections                                             Joint power agreements, memoranda of understanding
Democracy                                          Efficiency,
Elected officials                                  Appointed officials (bureaucrats)
Fragmentation/inefficiency                 Integration/efficiency
Local government,                              Regional/state government
Local restoration                                 Regional restoration
Less government                                 More government
Decentralization                                  Centralization /consolidation
Taxes/fees on’ grazing/mining             Taxes/fees on recreation
Gov’t subsidies to agriculture                         Environmental subsidies
Fees for public parks                           No fees on backpacking trails
Subsidies for grazing/mining                             Subsidized hikers, rafters, skiers
Hunting                                                                       Wildlife watching/photography
Recreational fishing                                                    Rafting
Multiple use                                                                Limited recreational use by a few
Public beaches                                                             Riparian habitat for fish, frogs
Casinos                                                                        Backpacking
Low density tourism                                                   Centralized tourism centers
Power production                                                       Power conservation
Powerline corridors                                                     Wildlife corridors
Dams, diversions                                                         Salmon, trout Conservation
Energy development                                                   Conservation
Water for humans                                                       Water for fish
Farmers’ water                                                             Fisheries water
Reservoirs                                                                   Free-flowing rivers,canyons
Dams/water development/use                                     Habitat for fish, frogs
Continued from Last Month- Part
2: Why and Where we’re losing
Chart II, “Man’s Perceived Threats to Nature,” shows everything harming nature. Science is not so sure.

Chart II – Man’s Perceived Threats to Nature

MAN’S THREATS THINGS SCIENTIFIC
(Must be stopped or reduced) HARMED FOUNDATION
Grazing, mining, logging, Frogs, toads Poor/unknown
damming, toxic discharges
Air/water pollution ” “& snakes, Speculative
lizards, turtles Lacking
Deforestation, grazing Birds: warblers, Poorly quantified
flycatchers, thrushes
Old growth logging, Spotted owls “Known [sic]”
brush removal
Pesticides, lead falcons,eagles “Well estab-
condor, osprey lished”
Logging, grazing, devel- Bighorn sheep, Adequate?
opment mule deer, bears,
mt. lions,coyotes
Logging; grazing, reser- Hare, beaver Very poor
voirs, fire suppression
Climate change Insects Unknown
Burning, dust, grazing, Vegetation Assumed
logging, development
Air: orone, sulfates, nit- Jeffrey Pines Probable
rates, acid fog, dust,
Logging, grazing, develop- Soil erosion Known, poor data
ment, fire suppression On trends
Fire protection of Wildlife resources Doubtful
property
Clearcutting/salvage Diversity of tree Known [sic]
harvest Species
Gt, sequoia “grove Biodiversity known [sic]
enhancrnt”lfire suppression
Cattle/sheep grazing Grass Mt. meadws Known [?]
Air pollution/ozone Yellow pines Maybe

Leave a Reply